A company has every right to say what your $59.99 (or whatever the price was) is exactly for, and in MvC3's case it was everyone but Shuma and Jill. Am I honestly missing something?
Nope! People just think that anything completed before the game shipped should be included in the base price (Insignificant here, since Jill and Shuma were not 100% anyway!) They find paying for content they "already own" to be a shady, unfair business practice. (When, in reality, they don't "own" that content, or any of it, in the first place!)
A comparision has been made to old Font floppy disk back in the 80's: With some, you'd have to buy an additional liscene in order to access more fonts on the disk. If you can put 100 dollars of info on a disk, but sell a part of it for 20, and give others the chance to access that additional 80 bucks worth, while minimalizing your shipping cost, why shouldn't you do it?
Also note that PS3 charges publishers for data transfer on DLC, and Microsoft charges for title updates after a certain amount of time, too, and also only allows DLC that adds achievements to be released at staggered intervals. There's a lot of politics that go into how we get our items; most consumers don't care, however, they're primarily concerned with what that means for THEM. Which is their right, but still...
It all suprises me, still, lol. My first throught when I hear about new content for a game I love is "WOOHOOOOOOO!"" Second is, "WHEN, WHEN?!?!??!?!?" Price is an issue, surely, but I'd rather spend 5 bucks making a game I love better, than 60 on some other game I might not like as much, y'know?